More than one birth record for the same person??

[estiman]

Hi,  I have three people with more than one birth record on FreeBMD/GRO.  The parents co-habited while the mother was still married.  In fact, I'm 99% certain there was never a divorce.  So, they were not married but had three children - 1923, 1925, and 1927.  For the births in 1925 & 1927 there were two birth records for each - one with the father's surname and the other with the mother's married name.  FreeBMD/ GRO reference the same for both entries.  The 1923 birth is even more complicated.  Her birth is again recorded twice but in 1936.  The 1923 records have a hand-written correction/ addition, again for both family names.  So, in this instance there are four records!  How legal is/ was this to have both names recorded for the same person?  I can attach a composite of the four references if this helps.

[Marmalady]

Remember that the FreeBMD & Gro are just Indexes to the actual registration

So as the parents are not married, the child would be registered in the Mother's surname and the father's name would only be entered if he was present at the registration

These entries are then indexed under both names on the certificate. But  both references will lead back to the one single registration entry

For the one that was amended -- i would guess that the father was not present at the original registration but went later and so the entry was amended to include his name
Not sure why it would then be re-registered 13 years later --are you certain this is the same child?

[estiman]

Not only are both surnames recorded but they give rise to two separate registration entries.  The handwritten 1923 entries reference the 1936 ones.  I am certain it is the same one.  I was going to attach the records but decided against it, in case the person is still alive.

[Marmalady]

What, precisely, do the entries / notes say?

Can you give a transcription using fictitious names if you don't want to post the actual entries?

[KGarrad]

At some point (I believe 1920's?) it became possible to re-register a child's birth, adding the father's name, once the couple married or the child was officially adopted.

After 1874, it was only possible to add a father's name if he was the husband of the mother, or if he was present at the registration - hence the blank spaces!

It looks like what has happened in your 1923/1936 case is that the father's name was added later.

[Colin Cruddace]

It sounds to me as though the first wasn't registered until 1936 and the 1923 entries are handwritten amendments as to where to find the certificate. The register entry would read something like 'See Mar 36'. Possibly needing proof of age for future employment and discovering that there wasn't one. If this is the case then both parents would need to be present if still unmarried to each other.

Colin

Edit - I should have said handwritten additions to the Index pages

[estiman]

The two handwritten additions to the 1923 records give the Bermondsey 1d (blank) reference plus 'See S/36'.  Then the 1936 printed record gives the full information - again 2 entries, 2 surnames, identical GRO reference. Probably not needed for employment (only aged 13 in 1936) and not married till 1943.

The births of the other two siblings are each listed (twice) at the correct date (1925 & 1927) with the same GRO reference, different surnames.

Am I being too respectful of their privacy (illegitimate birth) or at this stage in life, does it really matter?

[Marmalady]

"Probably not needed for employment (only aged 13 in 1936) and not married till 1943."

Official school leaving age was 14 --so maybe she was applying for jobs at the time

The "two entries" are the same registration being indexed under both the mothers & the fathers surnames --they would both lead to the same certificate

It does sound like the registration was missed in 1923 and so was a late registration in 1936. Again, indexed under both surnames leading to one actual registrations certificate
With a note in 1923 under both surnames as to where to find the late registration


So in all 3 cases the same one registration for each birth has been indexed under all applicable surnames

[majm]

I am in New South Wales, Australia, and I have a fair understanding of how the system of birth registrations has worked in NSW.    As I understand it, a similar set of principles operated/s at the GRO. 

So this suggests to me that GRO should have just the ONE birth registered for the one person, but the GRO index itself can have several entries within that one INDEX under the possible surnames for that person.   

So, in NSW in the  late 19th and well into the 20th Century, a married couple's baby becomes known by the same surname as that baby's mum, which happens to be the surname of her husband, due to her becoming known by that surname, upon her marriage.   The actual NSW form from those decades up to around the mid 1930s did not include a heading for the baby's surname.   I am sure that the experienced UK RChatters familiar with GRO records will know if GRO birth certificates have a separate column heading for the baby's own surname. 
   
So, in NSW records  : If mum is not married to the baby's dad but dad acknowledges that he is the father, then both surnames are included in the registration under different column headings, (mother's details, and father's details) so both parents' surnames are indexed, but only ONE birth is registered.  If mum does not have the dad's express permission to name him on the registration, then the index will only list her surname.     There is provision in NSW for later endorsements.   These often need serious legal actions to alter the original information.   NSW BDM online birth index is free to search, and it includes spelling variations eg Mc and Mac are often separately indexed, and hyphenated surnames are often indexed under BOTH 

The obvious way to learn what is actually on a record (as opposed to an index) is to obtain a copy of the record itself.  I use the word 'record' to refer to the actual document, the birth certificate.  Perhaps the OP is using the word 'record' to refer to the index.

Cheers,  JM

Hi,  I have three people with more than one birth record on FreeBMD/GRO.  .......  The 1923 records have a hand-written correction/ addition, again for both family names.  So, in this instance there are four records!  How legal is/ was this to have both names recorded for the same person? .....